Forum:First Chamber
The First Chamber forum is only opened to Members of the Congress. Here MOTC can propose law proposals and other federal issues. They can be discussed and adjusted, until there are replaced to the Second Chamber for vote. Older proposals Third Amendement: Rights of every human being in Lovia Content I propose a little change of article 2.1 from #Every human being and citizen has the right: ##Of freedom of thought, meaning and religion. ##Of equality, by race, religion, political opinion, language, sex, property, birth or other statuses. ##Of privacy. ##To have personal or common property. ##To be arrested in a trial and to be treated correctly. ##To have a residence. ##To work and to receive education. ##To relax and recreate. ##To live in peace with his or her fellow-men. ##To live in welfare. ##To become a Lovian citizen. to #Every human being and citizen has the right: ##Of freedom of thought, meaning and religion. ##Of equality, by race, religion, political opinion, language, sex, property, birth or other statuses. ##Of privacy. ##To have personal or common property. ##To be arrested in a trial and to be treated correctly. ##To have a residence. ##To work and to receive education. ##To relax and recreate. ##To live in peace with his or her fellow-men. ##To live in welfare. ##To become a Lovian citizen. ##To express him or herself with the purpose of communicating. Correct translations to the official language must be provided when asked and the official language has to be used for all writing of articles, with the exception of literal quotations and local vocabulary. to enlarge the freedom of the Lovians. --Oos Wes (Bès) 05:11, 2 April 2008 (UTC) Talk Gentlemen, I am aware of the fact that both the First and the Second Chamber are only meant for Congressmen and women. Herefor I offer you my sincerest apologies. I wanted to advise the honorable Members of the Congress with some of the accurate knowledge I have achieved at a certain stage of my life. For an internet based constitution, I must admit, this is a work of art. It is a quite a long law text, good content and clear words. The Second Amendment proposed above sure was the most valuable thing to add at this moment. The Third Amendment, proposed by Sir MOTC Ilava, is small but very positive for all of us. Though there is a problem. :To speak their native language, as long as other people can understand them. First of all, why native language? Only your native language, or others as well? And must these be recorded to be sure it is your native language? Then, other people, this is too vague to be adopted in a law text. Please change this, exempli gratiã as long as they make themselves understandable to all". At last I throughsee holes in this sentence. You could conclude you can speak any language you see as your native one, whenever you want, as long as the one you are talking to understands you. Or, you could see it as the possibility to speak your sole native language, to more than one ("other people") who understand it, with the exclusion of any official occassion, because (American) English still is thé national language (11.4). There is a good idea in this sentence, but the words are wrong. I hope you might want to consider adjusting it. Your humble servant, George Matthews 06:23, 2 April 2008 (UTC) :What about: ''to express himself in any language with the purpose of communicating. 06:38, 2 April 2008 (UTC) ::That would be a certain improvement. Then "communicating" replaces the "others"-problem. "Any language" is open, but not bad. I still think we might need something about differences with the use of official languages, (American) English... George Matthews 06:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC) :::Thank you very much for your explanation. This could be of good service. :::Maybe we could do something like this: to express himself in any language with the purpose of communicating. Correct translations must be provided when asked. :::Would this be better? 06:45, 2 April 2008 (UTC) ::::Let's add to the official language and that's good. Then, at last, something on use of other languages in articles should be added... ::::to express him or herself with the purpose of communicating. Correct translations to the official language must be provided when asked and the official language has to be used for all writing of articles, with the exception of literal quotations and local vocabulary. ::::What about this version? George Matthews 06:51, 2 April 2008 (UTC) :::::To me, this looks perfect, but should we not mention in the same sentence the official language is American English in order to get it straight from the start ? 07:19, 2 April 2008 (UTC) ::::::It is I think in article 11 too, but that wouldn't be bad. I like the last proposal. Dear OWTB, would you like to adopt these last adaptions to you proposal? 08:14, 2 April 2008 (UTC) :Surely, I'll do. --Oos Wes (Bès) 14:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC) Town and City Act Nowadays, all separate places are towns, except for the capital, Noble City. Our Constitution does not mention when a place is a town or a city, so I would like to add a section on this subject to the Federal Law. Content * Article 7 - Town and City Act *# All Lovian separate settlements are classified into two denominational groups: towns and cities. *# A town is a separate minor location, governed by a Mayor. *## A town can be: *##* an area of the size of a neighborhood. *##* an area of the size of a neighborhood, including the adjacent neighborhoods. In this case the town's center is seen as the town itself, and not as a separate neighborhood of the town. *##* an area including several neighborhoods. *## A town has at least one full size neighborhood, the town itself. *## The maximum number of neighborhoods within a town, including the town's center, is four. *# A city is a separate major location, governed by a Mayor. *## A city is invariably a group of neighborhoods. *## A city has at least five neighborhoods. *## There is no maximum to the number of neighborhoods within a city. *# A town can turn into a city whenever the number of finished and usable neighborhoods, including the town's center, is five or more. *# A city can turn into a town whenever the number of neighborhoods is lowered to four or less. Adjustments propose adjustments in the talk section Talk What do you MOTCs think~of this Federal Law proposal? 18:38, 12 April 2008 (UTC) :To me, this looks great, apart from the fact that I think the mayor of a city will not be too happy if downsized to a city overnight. (smile) 08:10, 13 April 2008 (UTC) ::Well, of course, we will talk to the mayors before something like this happens. By the way, a city won't easily loose its neighborhoods, don't you think so? 08:13, 13 April 2008 (UTC) :::This is great news for Newhaven. This proposal has my full support. 08:15, 13 April 2008 (UTC) ::::Indeed, this act would make Newhaven a city, which it already should have been. 08:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC) Vote